Did the Burning Bush Lie to Moses?
Barry Hofstetter nebarry@netaxs.com
Thu, 06 Nov 1997 07:06:36 -0500 (00878839596, MLbY0MLqDBlc092yn@netaxs.com)
>There are other examples that could be noted, but these are sufficient to
>see that Barry's explanation will not work. I do, however, agree with his
>opinion that there was no effort to deceive in the translations that use the
>LORD for Yahweh. The name came to be considered too sacred to pronounce,
>and so the Jews in reading their scriptures aloud would substitute the
>Hebrew equivalent for Lord when the name Yahweh appeared. I understand that
>Jewish translations in English still use the LORD rather than YHWH.
>Farrell Till
>Skepticism, Inc.
>jftill@midwest.net
Thanks, Farrel. I asked the question honestly, since I didn't have time
to research it last night. However, you will note that my response was
two-fold:
1) The use of YHWH in Genesis is deliberately anachronistic,
according to the theological purpose of the author. This
would be quite in line with what we know about ancient writing
in general, and the covenant-historical writings which
comprise the narrative portions of the OT in particular. The
type of genre used sets up expectations concerning the level
of facticity and consistency which the reader expects, and
modern fundamentalists and many skeptics have erred by
having the wrong expectations of the Scriptures. Many
supposed contradictions are really the result of a genre
mis-identification.
2) What is intended by Ex 6:3 is not that the name was
literally revealed for the first time in Gen 6:3, but that the
particular meaning of the name as related to God's
covenant-redeeming-faithfulness was revealed because of the
circumstances of the exodus (Ex 3:14). The Hebrew *shem*
(name) has a broader semantic range than the usual English
equivalent.
N.E. Barry Hofstetter
Tota fere sapientiae nostrae summa...
duabus partibus constat,
Dei cognitione et nostri.
-Calvin